AEFP 45th Annual Conference

Toward a Meaningful Impact through Research, Policy & Practice

March 19-21, 2020

AEFP 45th Annual Conference Program

Please note: All times are Central Time (CT)

Program Contacts Upload papers Download papers

Displaying 1 - 44 of 44
Sort by concurrent session
Enter either title, name, institution or session
Concurrent Session IV - Thursday, March 19, 2020 - 2:30pm to 4:00pm
4.01 - Contextual Influences on Educator Mobility

Chair: Katharine O. Strunk, Michigan State University

Lori L. Taylor, Bush School of Government & Public Service at Texas A&M University. Teachers and Capital Stocks: The Link Between Facilities, Poverty and Teacher Labor Markets in Rural Areas
Stephanie Levin, Learning Policy Institute. Understanding and Addressing Principal Turnover: A Mixed Methods Study. Stephanie Levin, Learning Policy Institute, Kathryn Bradley, Learning Policy Institute, Ayana Campoli, Learning Policy Institute, Caitlin Scott, Learning Policy Institute
Bradley D. Marianno, University of Nevada. When Working Conditions Change: How Changes to Collective Bargaining Agreements Affect Teacher Exit in Michigan. Tara Kilbride, Michigan State University
J. Edward Guthrie, Tennessee Education Research Alliance. The Narrowest Silos: Collaboration, Growth, and Attrition Among Instructionally-Isolated Teachers. Susan Kemper Patrick, Vanderbilt University
4.02 - Contexts and Impacts of Professional Learning for Teachers

Chair: Roddy Theobald, American Institutes for Research

Arielle Boguslav, University of Virginia. Implementation of Content-Focused Group Learning and Coaching Program at Scale. Julie Cohen, University of Virginia, Veronica Katz, University of Virginia, Katharine Sadowski, Cornell University, Emily Wiseman, University of Virginia, Jim Wyckoff, University of Virginia
Yihua Hong, RTI International. Why Comprehensive Teacher Induction did not Work? Assessing Mentoring Quality and School Support. Guanglei Hong, University of Chicago, Kavita Kapadia Matsko, Northwestern University
Nicholas Wright, Florida Gulf Coast University. Teacher Coaching and Math Performance: Evidence from a Math Specialist Intervention. Patrice Anderson, Western Michigan University
Emily Wiseman, University of Virginia. Targeted Professional Development at Scale: Evidence from the District of Columbia Public Schools . Julie Cohen, University of Virginia, Jim Wyckoff, University of Virginia
4.03 - Outcomes of English Language Learners

Chair: Laura Hill, PPIC

Umut Özek, American Institutes for Research. An Extra Year to Learn English? Early Grade Retention and the Human Capital Development of English Learners. David Figlio, Northwestern University, Umut Özek, American Institutes for Research
Camila N Morales, Georgia State University. The Impact of English Learner Classification and ESL Delivery Method on Academic Achievement
Audrey Boochever, Aspire Public Schools. Effects of English Learner Initial Classification on Academic and Non-Academic Outcomes. Audrey Boochever, Aspire Public Schools, Edward Cremata, Aspire Public Schools
iliana Brodziak de los Reyes, AIR. Implementing an Intensive Tutoring Program for Struggling Spanish-speaking ELLs: How much Does Descubriendo La Lectura (DLL) Cost? . iliana Brodziak de los Reyes, AIR, Maryan Carbuccia,AIR, AIR, Bo Zhu, AIR, Trisha Borman, AIR, Geoffrey Borman,AIR,
4.04 - School Starting Age, Pre-K and Kindergarten Experiences

Chair: Marie Hull, University of North Carolina at Greensboro

Richard W DiSalvo, Princeton University. The Effects of Pre-K on Later Grade Enrollments: Is Pre-K a Welfare Magnet?. Tarsha Vasu, University of Rochester
Finagnon Antoine Dedewanou, Université Laval. Grandparents’ Involvement in Grandchildren Education
Cassandra Benson, United States Air Force Academy. School Starting Age and Child Disability: Evidence from North Carolina
Brian Krauth, Simon Fraser University. The effect of full-day Kindergarten on student achievement. Jane Friesen, Simon Fraser University, Brian Krauth, Simon Fraser University, Ricardo Meilman Cohn, Simon Fraser University
4.05 - Tracking Revenues and Expenditures in Education

Chair: Zahava Stadler, EdBuild

Robert Toutkoushian, University of Georgia. Determinants of state funding for public K-12 education: A panel data analysis . Sean Baser, University of Georgia
Nathan Favero, American University. Do Relative or Absolute Spending Levels Matter More? Local Competition, Spending Spillover Effects, and Student Achievement. Aeric Koerner, American University, Kari Dalane, American University
Stephen Cornman, Columbia University-Teachers College. Do Equity and Adequacy Court Decisions and Policies Make a Difference for At-Risk Students following Abbott, Rose, McDuffy, and Hancock? Longitudinal Evidence from New Jersey . Stephen Cornman, Columbia University-Teachers College
Tammy Kolbe, University of Vermont. When Money Shouldn’t Matter: The Relationship Between Education Spending & Special Education Identification. Tammy Kolbe, University of Vermont, Elizabeth Dhuey, University of Toronto
4.06 - Student Achievement and Teacher and School Quality

Chair: Cassandra Hart, University of California

David M. Houston, Harvard University. The Effects of Achievement and Growth Information on Perceptions of School Quality: Evidence from a Survey Experiment. David M. Houston, Harvard University, Michael B. Henderson, Louisiana State University, Martin R. West, Harvard University, Paul E. Peterson, Harvard University
Beth Schueler, University of Virginia. Evaluating Education Governance: Does State Takeover of School Districts Affect Student Achievement? . Beth Schueler, University of Virginia, Joshua Bleiberg, Vanderbilt University
Kaylee Matheny, Stanford University. A Seat at the Table: How Tennessee Attained Rapid Achievement Gains While Advancing Equity Across Student Groups
4.07 - Curriculum and Grading Standards

Chair: Gary Ritter, Saint Louis University

Seth Gershenson, American University. The impact of high school teachers' grading standards
Adam Tyner, Thomas B. Fordham Institute. Do elementary students read better when exposed to more social studies and science?
Benjamin Arold, Harvard Kennedy School and University of Munich. Evolution vs. Creationism in the Classroom: How non-Scientific School Curricula affect Attitudes and Occupational Choice
David Grissmer, University of Virginia. Kindergarten-Based Lottery Evaluation for Long Term (3rd-5th Grade) Effects of Core Knowledge Charter Schools in Three Subjects (English, Math and Science). Richard Buddin, University of Virginia, Mark Berends, University of Notre Dame
4.08 - Returns to Degrees, Majors, Names, and Co-Education

Chair: Rajeev Darolia, University of Kentucky

Scott A. Imberman, Michigan State Unviersity. The Returns to College Major Choice: Mean Effects, Career Trajectories, and Earnings Volatility. Rodney J. Andrews, University of Texas at Dallas, Scott A. Imberman, Michigan State University, Michael F. Lovenheim, Cornell University, Kevin Stange, University of Michigan
Dana Shaat, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. When Sarah Meets Lawrence: The Effect of Transitioning to Co-education on College Major Choice and Earnings
Kirsten Clinton, Harvard. What's In a Name? The Signaling Value of a University Education
Weixiang Pan, Georgia State University. The effect of Associate Degrees on Earnings Growth and Volatility. Ben Ost, University of Illinois at Chicago, Weixiang Pan, Georgia State University, Doug Webber, Temple University
4.09 - Machine Learning Comes to Education Research

Chair: Matthew Baird, RAND Corporation

Tara Chiatovich, Panorama Education. Predicting Year-End Assessment Scores Using Classical Statistics and Machine-Learning Methods
Jonte Myers, Georgia State University. Importance of Teacher Qualifications for Predicting Mathematics Achievement: A Machine Learning Study. Nicholas Gage, University of Florida, Christopher Redding, University of Florida
Karin Gegenheimer, Vanderbilt University. Machine Learning as a Tool in Education Policy Analysis: A Case Study of Principal Feedback in a Statewide Evaluation System. Ellen Goldring, Vanderbilt University
Amy Li, University of Northern Colorado. Public Rhetoric on Student Loans and Debt: A Text Analysis of Twitter Users’ Data. Amy Li, University of Northern Colorado
4.10 - Success in STEM

Chair: Sarah Crittenden Fuller, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Elise Swanson, University of Southern California. Examining STEM performance in the context of a comprehensive college transition program. Elise Swanson, University of Southern California, Joseph Kitchen, University of Miami, Tatiana Melguizo, University of Southern California
Elizabeth S. Park, UC Irvine. Unrealistic Expectations?: The Gap Between Initial Academic Beliefs and Final Grades on STEM Degree Attainment . Elizabeth S. Park, UC Irvine, Sabrina M. Solanki, University of Michigan, Peter McPartlan, San Diego State University, Di Xu, UC Irvine
Jennifer LaCosse, Indiana University. The Impact of an Online Belonging Intervention on the Postsecondary STEM Persistence and Achievement of Underrepresented Racial Minority Students. Jennifer LaCosse, Indiana University, Nicholas A Bowman, University of Iowa, Christine Logel, University of Waterloo, Mary C Murphy, Indiana University
Will Zahran, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill. Does Applied-STEM Career and Technical Education Strengthen the College Pipeline for Low-Income High School Students?. Daniel Klasik, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill, Michael Gottfried, University of California - Santa Barbara, Jay Plasman, The Ohio State University, Will Zahran, University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill
4.11 - Effects of Promise Programs

Chair: Dominique Baker, Southern Methodist University

Takeshi Yanagiura, Columbia University. Should Free College Policies Require Academic Achievement? Effects of Credit Completion Requirement for Eligibility Renewal for Low-Income Students
Amberly Dziesinski, Vanderbilt University. Credential Attainment Among Tennessee Promise Students: An Event History Analysis. Amberly Dziesinski, Vanderbilt University, Russell VanZomeren, Tennessee Higher Education Commission, Amanda Klafehn, Tennessee Higher Education Commission
Isabel McMullen, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research. An Exploration of Kalamazoo Promise Scholars who Stop Out of College, and Who May Return. Daniel Collier, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research, Brad Hershbein, W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research
Lily Fesler, Stanford University. Local Promise Programs: Varying Short- and Long-Term Effects. Lily Fesler, Stanford University, Matea Pender, College Board
4.12 - Meaningfully Measuring Student Poverty and the Implications for Funding

Chair: Cheryl Logan, Superintendent Omaha Public Schools

Policy Maker or Practitioner: Cheryl Logan, Superintendent Omaha Public Schools
Discussants: Daniel Thatcher, National Conference of State Legislatures, Kristin Blagg, The Urban Institute, Peter Cookson, Learning Policy Institute

The reliability and validity of measuring a student’s family socio-economic status is basic to ensuring that the allocation of school funding supports the education of all students, especially those furthest from opportunity. For decades, states relied solely upon student enrollment in the National School Lunch Program’s (NSLP) Free and Reduced-Price Lunch (FRPL) program to identify students from low-income families. However, sole reliance on FRPL enrollment as a proxy for student poverty has limitations, including lack of verification, since the data is self-reported, or lack of family enrollment in the program. Further, the advent of the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) to FRPL, a component of the 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which permits schools comprised of over 40 percent FRPL-eligible students to provide free lunch for the entire school, obscures individual student family income information because it does require CEP schools to collect individual student income data.

In response to concerns about sole reliance on FRPL for identifying students from low-income families, many states have explored alternative measures to identifying students from low-income families—ranging from deeming students who are involved in the foster care system or those whose families are enrolled in public programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or Medicaid as low-income.

Many states are now asking—what are comprehensive and reliable measures of student poverty? This question is foundational to states’ ability to target funding and other needed resources to support schools serving high numbers of students from low-income families.

Unfortunately, the various approaches which states employ to determine student poverty, such as reliance upon family enrollment in public programs like SNAP or Medicaid, have the inherent risks. For example, undercounting or omitting students whose families may be reluctant to enroll in public programs may occur when relying upon direct certification of student family enrollment in such public programs. This risk is of great concern now as many impacted families, such as immigrant families, may be reluctant to enroll in public programs out of fear of retaliation or identification of status.

Panelists, which include school finance specialists and state policymakers, will examine the limitations of continued reliance on FRPL status as a sole measure of student poverty, the impact of the CEP on FRPL data, and the pros and cons of employing alternative approaches to measuring student poverty.

Panelists will offer recommendations for policymakers and stakeholders who are seeking to reliable ways to identify students from low-income families in order to target funding to provide supports and services that will help improve educational outcomes.